Game Theory and Partnership in Child Protection Practice

The aim of this paper is to highlight one of the contradictions between the main English government guidance for child protection practice--Working Together to Safeguard Children (1999), compared with the official published guidance on assessment practice: the Framework for Assessing Children in Need and their Families (2000). The contradiction refers to radically different models of decision that lie deep at the heart of both sets of guidance. This contradiction is examined in terms of a review of research on partnership, the decision theory literature, and particularly, game-theory analysis, together with research on personal 'influence' and how partnerships may best be effected. The paper argues that the Working Together model is strongly risk adverse and is in stark contrast with the Framework model that is consistent with other published mainstream risk decision models. The upshot of official practice in adopting such a harsh risk decision model is the alienation of service users who are subject to the scrutiny of authorities responsible for public care. This bodes ill for the concept of 'partnership', which is the key concept of social work practice, not only in child protection, but in all main areas of social care. An alternative perspective of the child protection process is offered with some applicability to other areas of social care practice and which aims to be less threatening and to encourage inclusiveness of service users.

Keywords:

• child protection
• child abuse
• game theory
• partnership
• partnership working
• stag hunt game pattern